ArticleProtein science : a publication of the Protein Society2005
Investigation of protein refolding using a fractional factorial screen: a study of reagent effects and interactions.
Article in Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed.
- Heterologous expression and foldase-assisted refolding of LipGoM, aBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2025Article
- Protein editing using a coordinated transposition reaction.Science (New York, N.Y.) · 2025Article
- Protein purification strategies must consider downstream applications and individual biological characteristics.Microbial cell factories · 2022Review
- A designed fusion tag for soluble expression and selective separation of extracellular domains of fibroblast growth factor receptors.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Cautionary Tale of Using Tris(alkyl)phosphine Reducing Agents with NADBiochemistry · 2020Article
- Refolding the unfoldable: A systematic approach for renaturation of Bacillus circulans xylanase.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2017Article
- Organocatalysts of oxidative protein folding inspired by protein disulfide isomerase.Organic & biomolecular chemistry · 2014Article
- Folding the proteome.Trends in biochemical sciences · 2013Review
- Experimental optimization of protein refolding with a genetic algorithm.Protein science : a publication of the Protein Society · 2010Article
- High-yield production, refolding and a molecular modelling of the catalytic module of (1,3)-beta-D-glucan (curdlan) synthase from Agrobacterium sp.Glycoconjugate journal · 2010Article
- Refolding active human DNA polymerase nu from inclusion bodies.Protein expression and purification · 2010Article
- Chemical shift assignments for human apurinic/apyrimidinic endonuclease 1.Biomolecular NMR assignments · 2010Article
- Protein production and purification.Nature methods · 2008Review
- Chapter 3. High-throughput protein purification for x-ray crystallography and NMR.Advances in protein chemistry and structural biology · 2008Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A recurring obstacle for structural genomics is the expression of insoluble, aggregated proteins. In these cases, the use of alternative salvage strategies, like in vitro refolding, is hindered by the lack of a universal refolding method. To overcome this obstacle, fractional factorial screens have been introduced as a systematic and rapid method to identify refolding conditions. However, methodical analyses of the effectiveness of refolding reagents on large sets of proteins remain limited. In this study, we address this void by designing a fractional factorial screen to rapidly explore the effect of 14 different reagents on the refolding of 33 structurally and functionally diverse proteins. The refolding data was analyzed using statistical methods to determine the effect of each refolding additive. The screen has been miniaturized for automation resulting in reduced protein requirements and increased throughput. Our results show that the choice of pH and reducing agent had the largest impact on protein refolding. Bis-mercaptoacetamide cyclohexane (BMC) and tris (2-carboxyethylphosphine) (TCEP) were superior reductants when compared to others in the screen. BMC was particularly effective in refolding disulfide-containing proteins, while TCEP was better for nondisulfide-containing proteins. From the screen, we successfully identified a positive synergistic interaction between nondetergent sulfobetaine 201 (NDSB 201) and BMC on Cdc25A refolding. The soluble protein resulting from this interaction crystallized and yielded a 2.2 Angstroms structure. Our method, which combines a fractional factorial screen with statistical analysis of the data, provides a powerful approach for the identification of optimal refolding reagents in a general refolding screen.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.